Thursday, May 7, 2015

Aikande Kwayu’sGoodbye
Two-Party System in #UK!
is of particular interest to those of us who are tired of ‘duopoly’ inmultiparty politics. I am tempted to
agree with its argument about the “decline” of the ‘two-party system’ and, in
terms of style, I like the way it concludes with the “reason for” versus “manifestation
of” what is referred to as the “inward-looking politics” in the UK.

In the introduction that is written in the ‘third
person’ though it is safe to assume it is Taylor who wrote/co-wrote it as he is
the editor of African Arguments, the
post says it “is a truism to state that British general elections are decided
by domestic politics.” This is to say in elections this is generally the deciding
factor. It qualifies this by saying it “is rare that events such as Iraq war
cut through talk of domestic issues to be truly influential for the
electorate.” Then it thus presents Kwayu-like argument: “This year such a
stereotype seems even more pronounced.... Africa’s non-appearance in the
manifestos is a symptom of a wider disinterest in international affairs during this
most insular of elections.”

What is problematic is that, like Kwayu, this
introduction divorces the UK’s “foreign policy” from (also being primarily a
matter of) the UK’s (strategic) ‘international trade’ hence these lines therein
that also brief us on why, comparatively, domestic issues matter more in this
election: “Development policy, in particular, is relegated to the back-end of
the manifestos. Foreign policy is about defending our borders or growing
British trade.”

Are
China and the US sidelining “UK’s space in Africa”? – Africans cannot afford to ignore the centering of
trade in foreign policy as evidenced in the case of the UK and Tanzania. Taylor’s
entry on the Conservative Party shows how it matters even if his views – or
theory of International Relations (IR) for that matter – may not be informed by
its overarching centrality to foreign policy in the case of Africa. He writes:
“The second [approach of the Conservative Party’s Manifesto to the outside
world] sees Britain as a brave mercantilist power, forging a path through
choppy seas via its sharp businessmen and clever diplomats. This section is
actually quite optimistic for ‘emerging economies’, into which classification,
in this context, most African countries should be viewed.”

Taylor then cites this statement from its Manifesto: “We
have boosted our exports to emerging markets, opened new diplomatic posts in
Africa, Asia and Latin America…to connect Britain to the fastest-growing
economies in the world.” Tellingly, this is his take on the quote: “It’s a good
point, the last ten years have seen unprecedented growth in African economies
and opportunities exist to exploit this, both for the benefit of them and us.
It also bemoans the fact that the UK is still too dependent on slow-growing
European markets. British diplomacy is more than ever about ‘selling’ Britain
Inc. to new buyers.”

Bailey’s entry on the other major party is thus also
revealing in relation to what I have termed the Corporate-State-Civil Society (CSC) Tripartite Foreign Direct
Investment (FDI) Setup: “Labour’s approach to trade is focused on
benefiting British business, as is evident in the title of its foreign policy
section: “Standing up for Britain’s interests in Europe and the world”. This
section includes plans to support access to international markets with the aim
of reasserting Britain as an international leader. As such, African countries
could be encouraged to enter more bilateral trade deals with Europe, whilst
focus on the private sector and its role in Africa’s development will be
secure.”

Are these the signs that the UK is
retreating/withdrawing from (global) Africa?

Karibu kwenye ulingo wa kutafakari kuhusu tunapotoka,tulipo,tuendako na namna ambavyo tutafika huko tuendako/Welcome to a platform for reflecting on where we are coming from, where we are, where we are going and how we will get there